[pct-l] Trail Maintenance and Mechanised Transport

[Jim Marco]

"We rely on people respecting the democratic process and the rules that come from it even when they don't like the restrictions."

Yes. I but I disagree that this is part of an immature person. As I quote, I am reminded that this fosters moral and ethical judgments of rules rather than blindly following them. Ideally, there shouldn't be rules, people should *know* to act according to the law through education. This is the part I don't care for in myself. In fact, I don't know half the laws. Some I routinely follow, using seatbelts for example. Some I do not, example: I usually speed.

In this case, how would I react to a "bikepacker" should I meet him on the PCT? Should I step aside as I would with another backpacker? Or, stand my ground? Should I be polite? Should I tell him he is being illegal? If I bikepacked, I would show that respect to others. I would expect that respect from others. Simply that.

Yet, bikepacking is clearly illegal. What of a pair of canoe wheels on portions of the PCT? Or pulling a pulk in winter?I can think of other examples where I, a backpacker, am forced into making an ethical determination and thereby passing a moral judgment on the poor guy. Not my place.  

This discussion, I find quite distasteful. Explaining how to act socially should not be necessary. Nor should explanations be needed, but I am a poor writer. Worse, I don't think all that well, incipient Alzheimer's or just plain old age, I'm not sure which.

But I see the existing rule as OK. Let the courts decide the grey areas, that is what they are for. There is no need for action (unless, as you say, I disagree with the rule.) These threats of violence, sticks in spokes for example, are NOT necessary. I don't believe that such violence will get us anywhere...'cept jail. Sometimes, this may be necessary, but not over this. No reason for it. WE *have* the rule supporting the trail as is. And, as you say, sanctions are not worth the risk. Worse, the forest service could start thinking the trail promotes an antisocial and violent group: Those d at mn Backpackers. 

We have bad laws enacted. We have seen bad laws repealed. In this case, it is a rule carrying a fine. Bikers do indeed have the right to protest such a rule. As I do with my canoe. But, the rangers have the right to "ticket" them, too. This is really a "call them into court and ask why". "Your day in court" continues to have meaning. Whether I happen to agree or not agree with the reason for his protest, I need to extend the same courtesy to him that I expect for myself, to paraphrase a great orator. "Your day in court", to me, means officially being heard by the government and is nothing to be feared. Indeed, the ticket is only a summons to ASK for your opinion (well, maybe an "I wasn't going THAT fast" is sometimes appropriate, ha, ha...) That is the time and place to be heard.
	My thoughts only . . . 
	James D. Marco

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-
> bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of Nathan Dreon
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:15 PM
> To: Pct-L at backcountry.net
> Subject: [pct-l] Trail Maintenance and Mechanised
> Transport
> 
> Breaking a rule for the sake of breaking a rule is not
> a piece of the culture I am most familiar with.  I
> doubt it is a healthy part of any viable culture.   It
> is practiced by the young and others with a similar
> mindset, to show that they are independent from the
> rule makers.  More mature members of society will only
> break a rule when there is some perceived benefit and
> an acceptable expected cost for the benefit derived.
> The Civil Rights movement comes to mind, as does
> speeding, though I can't speak to the maturity of the
> speeders.
> 
> I don't think we have ever all had the same vision.  We
> rely on people respecting the democratic process and
> the rules that come from it even when they don't like
> the restrictions.  Civil disobedience is sometimes
> necessary but without a general agreement to follow the
> rules, government of the people by the people for the
> people will perish from the Earth.
> 
> If you think of obeying the rules as your way of
> showing respect for the democratic process you may feel
> better about them.
> 
> Nathan
> 
> In response to:
> "I hate rules and regs not just because they are there
> and I must obey, I hate them because our culture also
> believes rules are ment to be broken. A don't
> compels/tempts us to do that which we would not do if
> it wasn't a law, reg or rule. Seems to me that truth
> should set us free from the bondage of selfishness to
> selflessness. To keep the PCT peaceful, contiguous and
> terrestrial we must all have the same vision."
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> 
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.